NDSUguy

This is not meant to slam the Sioux but more of a DaveK slam.... Every athletic program goes through its ups and downs. The logic behind the Sioux winning (or even going to) the FCS national championship game every 5-10 years based upon only the last 10 years is very flawed. As stated above, the past has shown that both NDSU and UND have had periods of dominance. That being said, since neither NDSU or UND has on average won a championship every 5-10 years that they have been in existence. I doubt that anything will change to make it MORE likely that something like that could happen. As a matter of fact, NO NCAA team has EVER averaged a national championship every 5-10 years. box.

My bad.... I didn't see it because I don't know who Joe Finley is..... I honestly didn't look past his first name.

Headline for "Sports Illustrated On Campus" on-line: "Top 10 Least Intimidating College Mascots: In honor of Bucky Badger, who was beat up by North Dakota State defenseman Joe Finley on Saturday, we present the nation's 10 least intimidating college mascots" NDSU is now getting credit for Sioux hockey action.... I mention this because for years, NDSU was often confused by UND in the national media.... Apparently things are changing.

I totally agree.... It's almost as if some people (not the majority) feel that payment for using the nickname/logo is native american programs. I am left wondering if UND would have these programs if they would have never been the Sioux. I personally think that UND would have just as many programs with or without the logo. No nickname should ever come in front of care helping other people. I understand your love for the Sioux logo and nickname but when all is said and done you'll love your team regardless of what they are called or not called.

Where was the game against McNeese State reported?

Why would indian programs, gambling decrease and poverty increase? still scratching my head over that comment....

Back to the original question...... I'd say never. I forsee the Sioux losing their ability to use the nickname within 3 years. I do see the UND <insert macot/logo name here> attaining #1 status sometime in the 5-10 years

I'll probably get blasted for this idea but here goes nothing...... There seems to be much hatred towards the NCAA for mandating this. Some have said that its "illegal" or "unconsitutional" for the NCAA to govern. To that my response is.... leave the NCAA. The NCAA is a group or club. Just like any self governed group the members must play by the rules. If UND and its supporters want to keep the name....then leave. If you want to say then ditch the name. It's pretty simple. Also, I have heard many criticize the NCAA and refer to it as NC$$.... Please feel free to give the NCAA its money back once a conference is gained for non-football sports. I"m sure that the NCAA would love to not have to give monies from the NCAA basketball tournaments to UND.

Yes, I do believe that the term "Fighting" is a negative reference. While you claim that the word "fighting" is in reference to the Sioux tribe's spirit, generally the term "fighting" is not used in that fashion. Fighting in general is in reference to verbal or physical conflict between more than one individual or group. The Sioux tribe never was a tribe that was known for their aggressive ways. So to label the Sioux with the word "fighting" is incorrect (and in the eyes of those who do not know of the tribe's "spriit") could possibly shed a negative light on a group that was not aggressive. No, I am not kidding. I think that my original statement holds true.

As a Bison fan, I personally don't care if UND keeps or loses their nickname. It really have an affect on me one way or the other. That being said, the argument regarding logos/macots of other people groups or animals has to stop. The reason that animals are not in play is because there has never been an animal that felt bad because of the use of them as a mascot. As far as the other people groups, Vikings, Cardinals, Saints, etc.... Outside of the Fighting Irish, I can't think of any mascot that refers to the mascot in a negative way (i.e. "fighting"). Another things is that most of these names are either not a group of people that exist today OR they are not specific to one specific group of people... While I believe that most Sioux tribal members don't have anything against the Fighting Sioux logo, I am sure that there are some that are offended. Once a Viking or a "Battling Bishop" gets offended by a nickname then they should be included.

I nominate that for least intelligent post of the day.

I'd say that it's hard to say.... It totally depends on the Sioux's schedule. Going undefeated will get you along way towards being #1 but if the schedule is too soft then that is a fine line to walk. I would think that the first 2 years there will be difficulty with scheduling and as a result the SOS will be lacking (due to playing D2 competition). After that... who knows.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/i...section=Opinion I can't believe that this gets stuff gets printed.... This has nothing to do with NDSU or its athletics. This article is entirely biased and lacks any acknowledgment of the other side of the issue.... The Fargo Force was a name that was chosen due to submissions from the citizens of Fargo. I can't believe that this has anything to do with UND or with NDSU. Furthermore, NDSU's transition to D1 athletics had more to do with the opportunity to do well at the next level than with our desire or "jealousy" of UND hockey!

While academics are very important when choosing a college...... please explain to me why UND would be so favorable vs. NDSU? After all, NDSU was on his top 3 list to begin with...... Since NDSU was on his top 3, I will make the assumption that he doesn't see NDSU as lacking in academics. Also, he could have listed UND as an option but he chose against UND. BOX!

This is quite humorous.... Rick has TOTALLY LOST HIS GRASP ON REALITY! The UND/NDSU rivalry is just that.... a rivalry. It should never be taken too seriously. As for labeling NDSU fans as "arrogant SOBs from Fargo"..... A good look in the mirror would do Rick some good.

I'm not intending to smack but..... If Colorado doesn't work out, why would he go to UND over NDSU? NDSU was in his top 3...wouldn't it make sense that he would got NDSU if he hated Colorado?

I'm curious to get the opinion of the Sioux fans out there.... I'd like to do an informal poll..... As of right now do you believe the current Sioux nickname stay or go? Please either answer Yes or No.

Anyone who states that UND would be clearly better is out of their mind. What would make you think this??? Is UND putting up offensive and defensive numbers that are clearly superior than that of the Bison? No. Are they winning big games against teams that they are not supposed to beat? No. Are they blowing away every team they play? No. Do they have as many schollys as NDSU? No. The combination of those three things should indicate that UND should not be better than NDSU. Given that NDSU is putting up similar offensive/defensive numbers as UND (but against better teams) should make NDSU at MINIMUM just as good as UND. Considering that we have many more schollys, logic would state that we should have MORE depth. Does anyone have any logical reason why UND should be "just as good" or "better" as NDSU? Please try to take off the kelly green glasses when responding.....

As someone who grew up in Fargo, went to NDSU and just recently moved from Fargo to Minneapolis I am completely aware of the examples that you stated above. All that said, Hockey at NDSU would never be as big a deal as Sioux hockey. I highly doubt that those who choose to drive to Grand Forks to watch the Sioux would suddenly stop cheering for the Sioux because NDSU had a team. The fact of the matter is that there are only so many ticket dollars to go around and bringing a new sport to town (especially when there is competition like the Sioux) is a bad business decision. NDSU will continue to fund it's football and basketball programs instead of hockey. We're looking for national exposure and a successful basketball team will always trump that of hockey -- even if NDSU could compete at the same level as UND.

I'm not much of a hockey guy.... If NDSU had a hockey team I would likely go to maybe 1 or 2 games a year. I think that NDSU could draw well but this would take time. With anything new there would be a buzz in the beginning and then after time (unless successful) the teams attendance would take a hit. Over time it is likely that hockey could be a revenue generator but I still wonder why it makes financial sense to fund a new sport that may or may not make money. NDSU would NEVER be admitted into the WCHA. NDSU would likely never be ranked nationally. NDSU would likely lose regularly to UND, Minnesota, etc in hockey. Since that is the case, why divert funds from sports that WILL draw big money/exposure (football, basketball) to a sport that will only be followed by a small percentage of the fans......

Nothing makes the work day go by faster than having a good chuckle at the expense of DaveK.... I don't always disagree with him but his blaming UNC, SDSU and NDSU for "ruining" the NCC is laughable. The change in the NCC was not nearly as important as the change in D2 as a whole. While the NCC might have went from being a powerhouse to something less desirable, the reason that these schools went D1 had nothing to do with those who were in the NCC. We loved playing teams like Auggie, SDSU, USD, Mankato and YES even UND. The reason that these schools left had EVERYTHING to do with the changing landscape of D2. The division as a whole was getting weaker, which is very evident now. It would have been favorable to move in a big group (NDSU, SDSU, UNC, USD and UND) but the decision was made by USD and UND to not go down that path. Regardless of the success of NDSU/SDSU/UNC, the move was right. The competition of the NCC and D2 as a whole was getting weaker prior to us making the move.

Personally, I do not believe that this legislation (regarding halving the time to become a core member) would have much of an effect on the Summit League. With the addition of NDSU and SDSU, I think that the current core members will be much more likely to stay in the Summit rather than bolting to another conference. The big reason that the Summit has historically been a transient league had more to do with lack of committment from the team members as well as the notion of the league being a bottom feeder among the college basketball ranks. With NDSU/SDSU showing strong commitment and stronger leadership at the top of the Summit, I fully expect that the Summit will become one of the more well known mid-major conferences in the country. I think that the most important part of this legislation has to do with the expansion of the FCS playoffs to 24 teams... This might allow for the Great West or other conferences to have an autobid and/or hope of making the playoffs with an at-large bid.

I am interested to see how this effects UND/USD and it's conference aspirations. I'm mostly interested in what happens to the GWFC as any admission to the Summit League will largely be dependent upon movement which with the new "Summit Plan" will likely not happen soon. This will certainly make the GWFC more stable but I still do not believe that there will not be an autobid waiting if and when the conference is eligible. There has been talk about stripping autobids from other conferences.... I just don't see that happening. While the primary argument to granting the GWFC an autobid seems to be based on the idea that the conference is very strong, I doubt that they would strip from another conference just because at this present moment their conference is not as strong. I believe that the only way that the GWFC gets an autobid is if they expand the playoffs. Has anyone seen/heard anything about that happening or is this just speculation from a previous post...

You are right... I'm not a girl. I understand that there may be situations that occur with the alleged victim if she were to see him again, etc. That being said, he was not yet convicted of rape and I guess all i'm saying is that the University should learn from the Duke case. The media, school, community and nation (for that matter) all determined that the lacrosse players were guilty. It turns out that they did nothing illegal and they were s&!t on for that. In this case, what if there are details surrounding this that have not come out. What if the girl was fully aware and consented. What if this is totally made up by the girl. Now, let me say that I don't believe that this was made up. However, that doesn't mean that I will automatically pass judgement on these guys for something that as of now they have only accused of doing. This is a very tough decision for a university to make. There are rape cases that happen every year on campuses around the nation. In those instances, the accused do not generally get expelled from school. These guys will ultimately be kicked out of school because they will lose their schollys. Why should they be treated worse just because they are football players? Suspension from the team but they keep their scholllys until the case is resolved is a fair situation.